By John Coleman - Founder of the Weather Channel

"It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create an allusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environmental whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon they claimed to be a consensus.

Environmental extremists, notable politicians among them, then teamed up with movie, media and other liberal, environmentalist journalists to create this wild “scientific” scenario of the civilization threatening environmental consequences from Global Warming unless we adhere to their radical agenda. Now their ridiculous manipulated science has been accepted as fact and become a cornerstone issue for CNN, CBS, NBC, the Democratic Political Party, the Governor of California, school teachers and, in many cases, well informed but very gullible environmentally conscientious citizens. Only one reporter at ABC has been allowed to counter the Global Warming frenzy with one 15 minute documentary segment.

I do not oppose environmentalism. I do not oppose the political positions of either party. However, Global Warming, i.e. Climate Change, is not about environmentalism or politics. It is not a religion. It is not something you “believe in.” It is science; the science of meteorology. This is my field of life-long expertise. And I am telling you Global Warming is a non-event, a manufactured crisis and a total scam. I say this knowing you probably won’t believe a me, a mere TV weatherman, challenging a Nobel Prize, Academy Award and Emmy Award winning former Vice President of United States. So be it.

I have read dozens of scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct. There is no run away climate change. The impact of humans on climate is not catastrophic. Our planet is not in peril. I am incensed by the incredible media glamour, the politically correct silliness and rude dismissal of counter arguments by the high priest of Global Warming.

In time, a decade or two, the outrageous scam will be obvious. As the temperature rises, polar ice cap melting, coastal flooding and super storm pattern all fail to occur as predicted everyone will come to realize we have been duped. The sky is not falling. And, natural cycles and drifts in climate are as much if not more responsible for any climate changes underway. I strongly believe that the next twenty years are equally as likely to see a cooling trend as they are to see a warming trend."

From: http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/comments_about_global_warming/

Dear dynosor,

I think that we might consider a previous "potential disaster" that the politicians and their ( highly paid) advisors came up with.

The Millennium Bug.

This was to be a cause of "Global Melt-down", but I believe that a single internal flight in Nigeria was delayed by twenty minutes or so.

Alas, there are much bigger and pinker snouts in a much deeper trough when it comes to "climate change".

Best wishes,

Martin

yeah.. wealthy tv channel founders know it all about everything, just ask them, or let them tell you.. also make them tell you what companies they have invested their millions into, and then you may see some of their political thinking's bedrock.

based on the weather channel's business model, this man is basically wrong 50% of the time, and has no problem with it. it is just like shamanic divining - you are going to be right 50% of the time. therefor some women can tell an unborn child's sex 50% of the time.. pretty damn impressive, if you are an ignorant tribesman and dont know about coins and their 2 sides.

Based on the weather channel's business model, this man is basically wrong 50% of the time, and has no problem with it.


Interesting point. So if we don't have the technology to predict tomorrow's weather with any accuracy, what makes Al Gore et al think they can predict the weather 100 years from now?

Dude... these are ad-hominem attacks... you don't attack ideas, you attack the person...
Martin, Maybe... the millenium bug was avoided because of the communication and preparation... an example a little more thought out would be to talk about the global cooling that was supposed to freeze us all to death in the eighties... how did they manage to make a 180 on this while keeping a straight face is beyond my understanding...

coins and their 2 sides

Your data are incorrect: Theoreticaly, it is possible for a coin to land on its edge :)

I propose to validate this theory by flipping loads of coins. Initial risk assessment studies indicate the possibility of RSI (repetitive strain injury) (1) so I propose a CNC controlled flipper with machine vision. External influences shall be minimised by the construction of a temperature controlled concrete bunker 100m down into the southern ice cap (2)(3). Independent adjudicators shall monitor the facility on- site, whilst all with direct interest in the results (ie me) shall monitor the results from off site, in the Bahamas, via satelite link.

I need a grant for further research please.

References:
(1) Phil McCrackin: 10 times Tiddly Wink champion and author of "My wrist aches".
(2) Luscious Linda: Director of "Solo Ladies" and co- author of "The effects of vibration from a personal perspective".
(3) A Polar Bear: [translation] "It's bloody cold down here, have you seen any seals?".

Martin, Maybe... the millenium bug was avoided because of the communication and preparation......

Dear GdeColigny,

Maybe... or maybe the potential "problem" was somewhat overstated...

Here is an article written a few days after the dreaded bug should have struck.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,3947148,00.html

Best wishes,

Martin

I think we should all adopt a polar bear, bring them home and feed them Islamic extremists! Kill two birds with one stone!

Your data are incorrect: Theoreticaly, it is possible for a coin to land on its edge :)

I propose to validate this theory by flipping loads of coins. Initial risk assessment studies indicate the possibility of RSI (repetitive strain injury) (1) so I propose a CNC controlled flipper with machine vision. External influences shall be minimised by the construction of a temperature controlled concrete bunker 100m down into the southern ice cap (2)(3). Independent adjudicators shall monitor the facility on- site, whilst all with direct interest in the results (ie me) shall monitor the results from off site, in the Bahamas, via satelite link.

I need a grant for further research please.

References:
(1) Phil McCrackin: 10 times Tiddly Wink champion and author of "My wrist aches".
(2) Luscious Linda: Director of "Solo Ladies" and co- author of "The effects of vibration from a personal perspective".
(3) A Polar Bear: [translation] "It's bloody cold down here, have you seen any seals?".

iman!

i love your idea! finally, something that can be proven!

i wasnt attacking the man. i was attacking the idea. in my oppinion wealthy tv founders should not be allowed to weigh in on scientific controversy, especially if they dont state their major investments.. people with huge abounts of money and no responsibility to the public should not be trusted, y kno? so really. i was attacking the very idea that this man's oppinion matters. i dont know the man, and i dont think i care wht he thinks of global warmings validity.. if he drives a car that gets less mpg than a model t(15pgish) then he is quite possibly lashing out over personal feelings of guilt.

personaly the idea that there are natural warming and cooling trends beyond human intervention is pretty obvious. only those who completely tuned out of high-school science are going to be incredulous enough to believe the oceans will envelope us in 20 year. that is absurd.. but still., that dosent mean that anything this man said was more than un-invited political rhetoric. i would bet all my pennies this man has political interests or economic interests that predispose him to one way of thinking.. ie 'let capitalists do what they want'

remember, just because someone takes a position, that dosent mean he has stated his real concerns. he sounds like a crank to me. who the hell does he think he is? oooooh... the founder of weather channel.. next we will care what founder of fox news personally thinks about war(s). (somehow i bet he is sort of into war and can see how soetimes war is a good thing)

that is the subtext here, isnt it?

I think we should all adopt a polar bear, bring them home and feed them Islamic extremists! Kill two birds with one stone!

i like the begining of this idea. i adore the society of polar bears and other large arctic mammals. however, may i propose you invite the islamists over for tea and a nice chat.. the polar bear could moderate.

Interesting point. So if we don't have the technology to predict tomorrow's weather with any accuracy, what makes Al Gore et al think they can predict the weather 100 years from now?

good question eh... what makes people think using these patroleum products is even remotely moral when they apparently lead to war and certain(though scale is unknown) environmental damage? people with money often seem to confuse their revenue source for repetitiousness. goes back to the old religious idea that rich people are the 'chosen ones' and that their comparative wealth is a 'sign'. i reject this idea.

my argument for al gore has been and continues to be 'if people dont take these dramatic stances, then the power of money will squash our chances to stop breathing so much poison at the massive-profit of everyone but us' (and apparently a few oil-loving curmudgeons with lots of money invested in our current and apparenly unsustainable oil consumption). apparently it is a fine idea to think that if i burn leaves i will get in trouble because there are alternative methods to get rid of leaves that are not dangerous and polluting, but comed owners are the god-granted chosen ones who can pollute all they want, then lie and cheat their customers, and still get their massive corporate bonuses and de-facto monopoly status.


i am done with this topic again, unless it involves tea parties and polar bears.. i also want some aurora borealis on the horizon.

well i know what i'm gonna do to combat climate change

i'm gonna give the g'ment all of my earnings for the next 30 yrs cos they say this'll help stop it .....baaaaa..baaaaa

By John Coleman - Founder of the Weather Channel

"It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create an allusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environmental whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon they claimed to be a consensus.

Environmental extremists, notable politicians among them, then teamed up with movie, media and other liberal, environmentalist journalists to create this wild “scientific” scenario of the civilization threatening environmental consequences from Global Warming unless we adhere to their radical agenda. Now their ridiculous manipulated science has been accepted as fact and become a cornerstone issue for CNN, CBS, NBC, the Democratic Political Party, the Governor of California, school teachers and, in many cases, well informed but very gullible environmentally conscientious citizens. Only one reporter at ABC has been allowed to counter the Global Warming frenzy with one 15 minute documentary segment.

I do not oppose environmentalism. I do not oppose the political positions of either party. However, Global Warming, i.e. Climate Change, is not about environmentalism or politics. It is not a religion. It is not something you “believe in.” It is science; the science of meteorology. This is my field of life-long expertise. And I am telling you Global Warming is a non-event, a manufactured crisis and a total scam. I say this knowing you probably won’t believe a me, a mere TV weatherman, challenging a Nobel Prize, Academy Award and Emmy Award winning former Vice President of United States. So be it.

I have read dozens of scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct. There is no run away climate change. The impact of humans on climate is not catastrophic. Our planet is not in peril. I am incensed by the incredible media glamour, the politically correct silliness and rude dismissal of counter arguments by the high priest of Global Warming.

In time, a decade or two, the outrageous scam will be obvious. As the temperature rises, polar ice cap melting, coastal flooding and super storm pattern all fail to occur as predicted everyone will come to realize we have been duped. The sky is not falling. And, natural cycles and drifts in climate are as much if not more responsible for any climate changes underway. I strongly believe that the next twenty years are equally as likely to see a cooling trend as they are to see a warming trend."

From: http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/comments_about_global_warming/

Lets just say he is right. And I do hope that he is right. So we will end up with what. Say

1. Environmentally friendly transportation.
2. Better and more advance environmentally friendly technology.
3. Less pollution in the city and more fresh air.
4. Less asthmatic problems for kids and adults alike.
5. More consistent weather pattern.
6. A brighter future.
7. Less stress from thinking the earth is going to warm up and kills us all.

I am sure there are more good reasons to vote for the fight against the so call global warming. At the end of the day, it benefits us all to be more responsible with our world. Whats wrong with that. Did it cost anyone money for a better world? Or even better, a better world for your children and their children and their children's children.

It doesn't benefit any scientists to claim global warming is happening but it benefits every other oil producing conglomerates to claim global warming is not happening.

Basically what I am saying is this. It doesn't matter whether GW is happening or not. But what ever it is, something good will always come out of it. Just like something good come out of the millenium bug problem.

Alex,

I have read all of your latest global warming related posts. You seem to have a good heart with a genuine desire to help others and to solve the world’s problems. You also seem to have just a little too much trust in those who proclaim to know exactly how to fix global warming and are in a hurry to implement their solutions.

If what was proposed was a low cost solution without risk of side-effects, then I say go ahead. However, if you follow the detail of what is proposed under Kyoto for instance, it becomes clear that we may be committing to a very expensive yet ineffective solution to a non-existent problem. For background on the above, read my post #39 in this thread: http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42162&page=4 (http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42162&page=4) See the third post from the top of page 4.

Medicine is based on the principle of "first do no harm". No treatment should carry more risk or produce more damaging side-effects than the problem you are trying to cure. When unsure of a problem or the appropriate treatment, watchful waiting is often the most sensible option.

You don't remove all cancer prone organs in healthy people to prevent cancer, "just to be on the safe side". We should not over-react to the scare of global warming for similar reasons. Giving politicians permission to do anything they like at any cost to stop GW is like allowing doctors to remove healthy organs, if only they can prevent cancer.

The notion that even bad ideas often produce good spin-offs, while observably correct does not soften my attitude even slightly: The autobahn is very useful to Germany and the envy of drivers world-wide, yet it was constructed as one of Adolf Hitler's public works programs. If I could rewind time to change history, I would remove all that Hitler did, even if that meant no autobahn. The flipside of this notion states that even the best intentioned ideas often have very costly unintended consequences.

I am all for energy independence and support nuclear power as the cleanest form of affordable energy. I agree with reducing preventable pollution in all forms, but carbon dioxide, like water and oxygen is a keystone of life: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvin_Cycle & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krebs_Cycle


CO2 is no more a pollutant than dihydrogen monoxide: http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html . Dihydrogen monoxide is a much more potent and prevalent greenhouse gas than CO2 and forms cloud-like structures that are known to reflect sunlight and infrared radiation, often leading to cooler days and warmer nights.

It doesn't benefit any scientists to claim global warming is happening but it benefits every other oil producing conglomerates to claim global warming is not happening.


Grant money for research... funding is a brazilium times easier to get when you are on a trendy subject... So it benefit scientists... big times... "My global warning... let me show it to you..."

Build us some more nuclear power plants.
Cleaner and far less radioactive emissions than cold fired plants.
Then we'll have more electricity to work on the alternative routes of energy saving.

I think we should all adopt a polar bear, bring them home and feed them Islamic extremists! Kill two birds with one stone!

Animal rights activists will be all over you for causing digestive discomfort to the bears. (Islamic radicals being filled with so much hate and all.) You might even find yourself in a lawsuit for introducing pollutants into the food chain.

Far better to feed them greenies, ecologists and GW advocates. Well on second thought, just look at what would then be released into the environment.

Gosh, doesn't appear to be a quick remedy. What is wrong with just having enough courage to just do nothing?

Alex,




[COLOR=black]CO2 is no more a pollutant than dihydrogen monoxide: http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html . Dihydrogen monoxide is a much more potent and prevalent greenhouse gas than CO2 and forms cloud-like structures that are known to reflect sunlight and infrared radiation, often leading to cooler days and warmer nights.



What the hell is Dihydrogen monoxide?
xyzdonna

What the hell is Dihydrogen monoxide?
xyzdonna

Is this a serious question?

Is this a serious question?

Hi Geof,
Geof your a chemist right? Do you have a way of removing CO2 from the air? I'm trying to come up with the most efficient way of taking CO2 out of the atmosphere. Of course I know about fractional distillation. That's where you freeze the air and then let it boil off. You can separate the nitrogen, oxygen, argon, neon, zenon, and all the other non's based on their distinctive boiling points. You follow me? This is gonna be kinda expensive and not useful for large scale removal of CO2 from the atmosphere. What about molecular sieves? You heard about them? Apparently they can filter out molecules depending on the aperature of the opening of the sieve. Would this work? We gotta figure out a way to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.
xyzdonna

Donna, your ignorance is showing again. Two hydrogen and one oxygen?

Hi Geof,
Geof your a chemist right? Do you have a way of removing CO2 from the air? I'm trying to come up with the most efficient way of taking CO2 out of the atmosphere. Of course I know about fractional distillation. That's where you freeze the air and then let it boil off. You can separate the nitrogen, oxygen, argon, neon, zenon, and all the other non's based on their distinctive boiling points. You follow me? This is gonna be kinda expensive and not useful for large scale removal of CO2 from the atmosphere. What about molecular sieves? You heard about them? Apparently they can filter out molecules depending on the aperature of the opening of the sieve. Would this work? We gotta figure out a way to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.
xyzdonna

Why remove it? :confused: Then all plant life except some muchrooms will die. DUH.
Dihydrogen Monoxide, aka H2O, just might be known as water... :D

remind me to get out of the states as soon as i turn 18 :P

and donna: wouldn't the line be to thin and be to easy to go back to ozone thinning problems? or am i completely wrong?

me


:withstupi

can i ask why people are so concerned about future generations ??

I truley disbelieve that we'll ever be able to predict the weather...I tend to like the weather sign idea...When you stand infront of the sign, it'll predict the weather. If you're getting wet, it's raining...being pumled, it's hailing...sweating uranus off, it's hot...ect.

I think we need to move away from gasoline powered vehicles just for the fact that you need to supplement your income to get to work...a trend that's only going down hill. While the electric alternative is just to ungodly expensive to start. We just need to perfect the StarTrek teleporter for transportaion...Ofcourse there'll be a couple of cases of "The Fly" in the process of getting there. But it's for the greater good. Go Polar Bears!!!

can i ask why people are so concerned about future generations ??

Some people do care about their kids and younger relatives. It is obvious that you do not or you would not have asked the question.

Don

Maybe he asks a rhetorical question, knowing tha there is NOTHING to worry about.

It's all just crap!
Check it out!
http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showthread.php?p=388814#post388814

I truley disbelieve that we'll ever be able to predict the weather

Ahhh.. how mistaken you are! I come from Scotland and we all know how to predict the weather, let me educate you:

1. If you're getting wet it's raining.
2. If you're not getting wet then rain will be imminent.

hehe

Ahhh.. how mistaken you are! I come from Scotland and we all know how to predict the weather, let me educate you:

1. If you're getting wet it's raining.
2. If you're not getting wet then rain will be imminent.

hehe


Hey...That sounds a lot like my sign idea...that I stole from somewhere else...
How dare you somewhat steal my stolen ideas!

(nuts)

:)